Re: transformation equations

On Apr 3, 5:44 am, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 2, 7:06 pm, "Eric Gisse" <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



OnApr2, 5:26 pm, "rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

OnApr2, 5:22 am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:1175515323.530846.159170@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

OnApr2, 1:06?am, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1175472812.508542.220490@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
OnApr1, 3:46?pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, unless you can show some mathematics, all you are doing is
talking.

I have .. you want it again?

Ok .. I'll give you the proof that the Galilean transforms are
inconsistent
with a constant maximum speed of light. See if you can keep up

Ignoring y and z (as they are unchanged), and assume we have a frame of
reference S' moving at v in x axis relative to frame of reference S (as
usual)

So, we have

x' = x -vt
t' = t

Lets look at something moving at velocity u in S. In any time t is will
move d = ut.

Apply the transform so see what that means in S'

x' = x - vt
d' = d - vt
d' = ut - vt

so the speed we observe in S' is

u' = d'/t'
u' = (ut-vt)/t'
u' = (ut-vt)/t
u' = u-v

That means if something is traveling at speed u in S, it will be
observed
as
traveling at u-v in S'

* So you cannot have a velocity that is constant in all frames of
reference.

Similarly, if we choose some speed (C say) as being the maximum speed
anything can travel, and then have objects a and b moving in opposite
directions in S at speed C (ie one has velocity C and the other -C)
then
if
observe from the frame of reference S' relative to b (which is moving
at -C)
we get the velocity of a being C - v = C - (-C) = 2C.

* So you can always find a velocity greater than a given "maximum".

That proves the Galilean transforms are inconsistent with the speed of
light, c, being the same in all frames of reference AND inconsistent
with
the speed of light, c, being the maximum speed.

All proven. Do you admit now that your combination ofequations
(Galilean
transforms and constant speed of light in all frames) just do NOT work?

I note that rbwinn has not tried to disprove any of this, or even claim
that
it is untrue, or respond in any way. Yet it is the undoing of his
attempts
to use Galilean transforms with a constant maximum speed of light.- Hide
quoted text -

It is not the undoing of anything.

Really?

We went through this before.

Yes .. every other time I've shown that it means galilean transforms cannot
work with the constant speed of light.

If a photon has a velocity of c relative to the origin of S
then the origin of S has a velocity of c relative to the photon.

Yes

So does anything else.

Exactly !! .. and that means Galilean transforms won't work. We've just
gone through that.

You need something OTHER than Galilean transforms .. a transform between
frames of reference that keeps the speed of light constant and a maximum.

So .. do you have such a set of transforms? I've got one .. its called
special relativity. Do you have an alternative to Galilean transforms and
special relativity that will actually work? If so, please present it and we
can move on to discussing it.

Well, I posted it before. From photon B, photon A has traveled a
distance of 2x, and a time of 2x has transpired in the frame of
reference of A, From photon A, the origin of S has traveled a
distance of x and a time of t has elapsed in the frame of reference of
A. You use ether theory and say that a time of t has elapsed in A and
photon B has traveled a distance of 2x and the origin of S has
traveled a distance of x. Sorry, but that is not what theequationsI
use show. I am using photons as clocks and they show otherwise.
Robert B. Winn

Idiot.

What do you even think ether theory is?

Look it up. I am not going to spend all day trying to explain ether
theory to you. The only thing you know how to do is to pretend to be
simple minded. Go pretend to someone who has time to play games with
you.

I am well aware of what ether theory is. Ether theory is the
assumption of a preferred reference frame, the medium in which all
things travel. It was thought to have made transmission of
electromagnetic waves possible. The idea has been discredited for over
a century, and isn't even fucking close to what you are talking about.

Robert B. Winn


.

Quantcast